Occasional errors in the administration of medicines to animals such as cattle and hogs have historically been considered by the agri-business industry to be an inevitability. Such errors (including variations) most often fall into one of two categories: (a) the administration of improper medicines; or (b) the administration of proper medicines in improper amounts. These errors and variations are almost always attributable to either human error or the mechanical failure of the devices used to deliver the medicines. For some errors and variations, the consequences to the health of the animal and the ultimate safety of the food products produced by the animal are minor. In other cases, the consequences can be costly and catastrophic.
Recently, numerous advances have been made in the mechanical devices used to deliver medicines to animals, with a view toward reducing such errors and variations. Notably, the Marking Syringe of U.S. Pat. No. 5,961,494 has revolutionized both the efficiency of the actual medicine delivery and the reliability of marking the occurrence and location of medicine delivery to the subject animal. While the failure to mark an injected animal (or marking a non-injected animal) has been recognized as a human-introduced "weak link" in the integrity of animal medicine delivery systems which results in administration of improper amounts of medicine, this problem is solved with implementation of the Marking Syringe taught in the '494 patent. Nonetheless, other, more problematic human-introduced "weak links" in animal medicine delivery systems persist.
Specifically, overworked and often undertrained farmhands can be counted on to occasionally confuse the complex medical names for the numerous array of animal vaccines and medicines and, as a result, apply the wrong medicine to the wrong animal at the wrong time. Such confusion carries a high cost.
Animal medications, such as vaccines, are generally provided in clear or translucent plastic or glass bottles of a standard, generic shape. The contents of the bottles are noted on labels affixed to the outside of the bottle. The bottles are initially sealed by insertion of a rubber stopper in the opening (throat or neck) of the bottle. A metallic "cap" is then placed over the opening in the bottle to retain the stopper in place and provide a safety seal to indicate whether the bottle has been opened or otherwise tampered with after being filled by the manufacturer. As mentioned, the bottles all have basically the same shape and non-descriptive color. The rubber stoppers are usually a generic color such as orange-red (though they are occasionally black or grey), and the caps are usually silver. Because most medicines have no distinguishing coloration of their own, the labels on the bottle are normally the sole means of visual determination of bottle contents. As such, the person retrieving bottles of medicine from a storage cooler or a refrigerator must make an accurate reading of the name of the medicine indicated on the label in order for the proper medicine to be administered to the animals.
With most animals, basic medicines given the animals can be divided into a limited number of general groups. In the case of cattle, which will hereafter be used as an example, the major types of medicines given fall into the general families of upper respiratory, clostridial, venereal/reproductive, antibacterial and antibiotic.
The administration of a medicine from an improper medicine family may carry grave consequences for the animal, costly consequences for the producer, and unknown consequences for the consumer. For example, the RB-51 vaccine is designed to ameliorate the effects of infection by the brucellosis virus and, thereby prevent unwanted abortion in female animals. As with many animal vaccines, the RB-51 vaccine is a "modified live virus" vaccine, meaning that a small amount of the living virus (in a highly attenuated form) is contained in the vaccine. When the vaccine is administered to the animal, the animal's immune system attacks and destroys the attenuated living virus. During this process, the animal normally develops sufficient immunity to the virus to avoid contracting the virus from outside sources.
This particular vaccine (RB-51) is specifically designed for application to female animals. Because this vaccine is only applied to female animals, subsequent tests of these animals will often reveal low levels of the brucellosis virus. At that time, the cattleman can check the medical history of the animal to verify that RB-51 was administered. If so, and if the administration was within sufficiently close time proximity to explain the corresponding brucellosis level detected in the animal, the test result is "normal" and operations continue.
If this vaccine is given to a male animal by mistake, detection of the brucellosis virus in the animal will cause deep concern and drastic measures on the part of the cattleman. There is presently no easy way to determine that the brucellosis was introduced by an accidental injection of the RB-51 vaccine. Instead, the cattleman must assume the possibility of an outbreak of brucellosis among the herd and take immediate remedial measures, at a significant cost in terms of dollars and time. Furthermore, if a group of male animals mistakenly received the RB-51 vaccine instead of a different scheduled medication, the animals have not received all of the medications they were expected to receive, possibly exposing them to other risks. Even if the mistake is detected after injection, the animals will then likely be injected with the originally intended medication, resulting in increased (and highly undesirable) levels of pharmacological residue is the derivative food products.
It is entirely possible that a male animal improperly injected with RB-51 may be destroyed, as a consequence of the above-referenced issues. Losing one animal to such a mistake is not good, but the reality of farm operations is such that any such mistake would be multiplied many times over. Specifically, one bottle of RB-51 vaccine, like most other vaccines and medicines, provides a sufficient quantity to inject at least 50, and maybe as many as 150 animals. Thus, a single error in setting up an injection system with an improper vaccine could mean necessary destruction of many dozens of head of cattle. The economic impact of such an error could be catastrophic in both the short term and long term.
Accordingly, there is an acute need for a system and method which will reduce or eliminate accidental administration of improper medicines to animals.